captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> woodruff: army staff sergeant robert bales faces 17 counts of murder in the killing of afghan civilians two weeks ago. good evening. i'm judy woodruff. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. on the newshour tonight, we detail the charges, and examine the challenges ahead for both prosecution and defense. >> woodruff: then, margaret warner assesses new counter- terrorism guidelines for storing and analyzing private information about ordinary americans. >> brown: ray suarez reports on a new international news network paid for by the chinese government, with studios in washington and an american audience. >> we uphold the traditional journalistic values, of

objectivity, truthfulness, and public accountability. >> i have my doubts about the journalistic integrity of the organization at this point. >> woodruff: we have the weekly analysis of mark shields and david brooks. >> brown: and we close with "the hunger games" phenomenon-- first, the books; now, the movie. >> woodruff: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: bnsf railway. >> the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

>> brown: army staff sergeant robert bales was formally charged with premeditated murder and other counts today in a shooting rampage outside kandahar, afghanistan. if convicted, bales would face a minimum of life in prison, and possibly the death penalty. in addition to the 17 counts of murder, robert bales stands charged with six counts of attempted murder and six counts of aggravated assault. initial reports said 16 afghan civilians were killed, nine of them children and 11 from the same family. military officials revised the number to 17, but offered no immediate explanation. while much is known of the alleged assailant, there has been less told of the dead, though npr's quil lawrence this week spoke with muhammad wazir, who lost 11 relatives in the massacre. >> ( translated ): like anyone, i wanted my children to be doctors, engineers, important

people. all my dreams are buried under a pile of dust now. i loved them all like they were parts of my body. i miss all of them terribly. >> brown: back in the united states, bales' civilian lawyer, john henry browne, spent 11 hours meeting with him this week. browne appeared today on cbs "this morning". >> my first reaction to all of this is, prove it. this is going to be a very difficult case for the government to prove, in my opinion. there is no crime scene, there is no csi stuff, no dna, no fingerprints. >> brown: bales was charged at the u.s. military prison at fort leavenworth, where he's been held since last week. bales joined the army in 2001, after working in investment banking. after his name first became public, former neighbors and comrades spoke highly of him. more recently, other details have emerged. in 2003, for example, he was reportedly ordered to pay a $1.5 million fine for securities fraud.

and in 2002, he was arrested for drunken assault and was ordered to anger management training. in public statements, browne has laid the groundwork for a defense on bales' mental state, citing an untreated concussive injury and long-standing memory issues. but he told cbs today that one thing was clear. >> i don't want to put the government on trial. i don't want to put the military on trial, that i respect greatly. but i think the war is on trial. >> brown: legal proceedings are expected to move to joint base lewis-mcchord, bales' home base. and we're joined now by eugene fidell, president of the national institute of military justice. he's also a senior research scholar at yale university law school. and retired lieutenant colonel gary solis was a lawyer in the marine corps, and now teaches at both georgetown and george washington university law schools. eugene fidell, i will start with you. first, were there any surprises for you today in these charges?

>> no, there really weren't, aside from the slight change in the number of victims. this is what we had been led to believe, based-- the quite preliminary reports that had come out. >> gary solis? >> i would have expected a few more less-significant charges just as fallback positions for the government if they lost their primary case. >> brown: let's start looking at some of the challenges. the chief challenges for the prosecution. >> the prosecution does have their challenges. they have to prove someone is dead, and those bodies have been buried and they're not going to be exhumed. they have to prove they died by being shot way firearm, difficult to do when you don't have a body and you haven't had an autopsy, and they have to prove that sergeant bales did it. he was wearing a uniform. it was night. very dark night. he was wearing night vision gogs that obscured his face and he had a helmet on. it will be very difficult to find anyone who saw him.

premeditation will be difficult to prove if the defense raises a diminished capacity argument. and finally, i think negating a diminished capacity argument raised by three prior tours, traumatic brain injury, and prior wounding will be difficult. >> brown: let's hold off on the mental condition issues for the moment. eugene fidell, what would you add? would you add anything to the difficulties for the prosecution, particularly, of course, with all this being so far away? >> yes, it's a long distance away, and i think the crime scene is probably pretty chaotic, more chaotic than most detectives in the u.s. would prefer. but whether evidence has been successfully gathered or still can be successfully gathered remains to be seen. i mean, it's possible there may be exhumations, although i think that's problematic under islamic law, and it's possible there may

be eyewitnesses whose testimony will prove these charges would you want the necessity for exhumation or d.n.a. evidence or some of the high-tech things that professor solice has referred to. i think this is going to be tough for the government. >> brown: eugene fidell, take a look at the defense now. and, clearly, what we hear is that they'll be focusing on the mental state of robert bales, such issues as impact on memory loss, for example. >> well, memory loss does not get you off the hook if there's evidence of criminality. i mean, the question is what is the, evidence? but bee be that as it may, first of all, there is the insanity defense, provided for under the uniform code for military justice and the manual for courts martial. it's a defense the has to carry and carry by proof of clear and convincing evidence, and it has to be evidence of a severe mental disease or defect.

and i'm not a psychiatrist. i'm certainly not a forensic psychiatrist, but i still haven't heard the kind of suggestions that indicate that that defense would be available. that's not to say there isn't a benefit from being able to show that a person was not playing with an entirely full deck at the time. that might help to soften the blow and provide matter and kenueation and mitigation during the sentencing phase of the capital case. >> brown: p.t.s.d. not a defense in itself. what kind of medical history would you expect to come out and what kind of impact? >> presuming there's no insanity defense-- and brown has said there will not be-- then there would be a box into-- if i were defense council, that he has had traumatic brain injury, he has been wounded twice, he has had

three prior tours, he's undergone a lot of stress in combat and all of those things combined to create diminished capacity, while although not a defense may be argued to the jury. if you have a sympathetic jury that accepts that, they may find that he was not able to premeditate his crimes, which would lessen the punishment greatly. >> brown: what about this-- we just heard at the end of our setup, the provocative statement by his attorney saying, "i'm not putting the war on trial but the war is on trial." now you want to start with that gary solis? what's your reaction to that? >> well, i think if he's going to put the war on trial, that inevitably, the army must be put on trial. why did the army cent this ghent back for a fourth tour? why didn't they be more careful in investigating his possible p.t.s.d.? i think he says it, but i would expect that there will be an attack on the army as well. >> brown: eugene fidell, does

it play in explicit role or is it more implicit in the background of all this? >> maybe it's implicit in the background, but, gosh, that strikes me as a very tricky and hazardous defense strategy. the narrative of this case hasn't emerged yet, and if that's the narrative, i-- i would not want to endorse it. i think-- you know, there's an old saying, "when life gives you lemons, make lemonade." i would hope the defense would have something more directly related to this immediate set of allegations than testing the war. >> brown: you're agreeing. >> i do agree, and i think the military judge is going to stop any attempt by the defense to put the government, war, or army on trial, and he will direct them to stay with the facts. >> brown: just briefly, looking at what happens next. we don't know yet whether there would be-- the government would be asking for the death penalty. right? >> we do not, not until the case

is referred by the commanding general. >> brown: and them what happens? well then at some point we're going to have dueling psychiatrists. that is, there are going to be psychiatric examationsations isn article 32 investigation, akin to a pretrial investigation, and the investigating officer will make a recommendation as to whether or not the case should go forward. >> brown: and eugene fidell, does history tell us that this prostakes a while, a good while? how long? >> well, i think the trial could begin-- that is arraignment could take place later this year, maybe late this year, possibly early next year because there are going to be a lot of preliminary investigations that has to take play, both for the government and for the defense. now, if you ask me how long it will be before this case is over, including all the appeals and reviews-- that has to be calculated in years, rather than months. so i think everybody should-- aside from not either convicting

or acquitting staff sergeant bales, you know, through commentary, everybody should relax for a while and wait until the evidence unfolds, and the first step in that process will be the article 32 investigation. >> brown: all right eugene fidell, gary solis, thank you both very much. >> woodruff: still to come on the newshour: new rules for keeping data about americans; chinese television comes to america; shields and brooks; and the "hunger games" phenomenon. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: president obama publicly weighed in for the first time on the shooting death of an unarmed black teenager in florida. 17-year-old trayvon martin was killed last month by a neighborhood watch volunteer in a suburban orlando community. speaking at the white house, the president said the tragedy struck a cord with him personally. >> i can only imagine what these parents are going through.

and when i think about this boy, i think about my own kids. you know, if i had a son, he'd look like trayvon. and, you know, i think they are right to expect that all of us as americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves, and that we're going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened. tray >> sreenivasan: late yesterday, the governor of florida appointed a new prosecutor to investigate the killing after the original one recused himself. meanwhile, the justice department and fbi have launched a civil rights investigation. a grand jury is also considering charges. the president's comments came after he announced his pick to head the world bank. jim yong kim, the current president of dartmouth college, was tapped for the spot during a rose garden ceremony. the south korean-born physician

is a global health expert, and pioneer in the treatment of hiv/aids and tuberculosis. the european union imposed a new round of sanctions on syria today; this time, targeting the family of syrian president bashar assad. foreign ministers voted to ban his british-born wife, asma, from traveling to e.u. countries, and freeze any assets she may have in them. the e.u.'s foreign policy chief, catherine ashton, told reporters in brussels the new sanctions will put added pressure on the regime. >> they target individuals entities in ways that prevent them from carrying on the business of as usual. and secondly, they make strong political statements about how the international community feels about what's going on. never underestimate sanctions are really important, too, but they're not everything. and always they're within a political framework of trying to move things forward.

>> sreenivasan: in syria today, witnesses reported fresh shelling from government forces in several areas from aleppo to homs. new amateur video showed black smoke hovering over the city skylines. the u.n. estimates more than 8,000 people have been killed in the violent crackdown since it began a year ago. today, unicef reported at least 500 of those deaths were children. in iraq, a manhunt was underway for 17 detainees who escaped from a prison in kirkuk. police said ten of the prisoners have ties to al qaeda. they escaped at dawn from a small window using blankets tied together into a makeshift rope. g.o.p. presidential contenders today made their final appeals to louisiana voters, who head to the polls tomorrow for the state primary. rick santorum fired practice shots at a sheriff's shooting range. he leads mitt romney by double digits in recent polls. romney attacked president obama's health care overhaul. newt gingrich and ron paul also campaigned, hoping to keep their chances alive. the chief executive of m.f. global, former senator jon corzine, gave the order to transfer $200 million of

clients' money just days before the firm collapsed. that's according to a congressional memo released today by investigators trying to track $1.6 billion of missing customer funds. it included an email sent by a firm executive stating the money transfer was "per j.c.'s instructions" to cover an overdraft. last december, corzine testified before lawmakers that he did not know where any of the money went. on wall street, stocks eked out small gains today. the dow jones industrial average gained more than 34 points to close above 13,080 points. the nasdaq rose more than four points to close at 3,068. for the week, the dow lost more than 1%; the nasdaq rose four tenths of a percent. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to judy. >> woodruff: and to the obama administration's move to relax limits on the search and storage of information about americans. margaret warner has the story. >> warner: the updated guidelines allow the national

counter-terrorism center to keep any information gathered about americans or u.s. residents much longer, even for those without suspected ties to terror. the nctc, as it's called, was founded in 2004 as a clearinghouse for intelligence agencies to help "connect the dots" among the massive amounts of information collected by the nsa, cia, fbi, the pentagon, and other agencies. the director of national intelligence, james clapper, and attorney general eric holder announced the changes in a statement released yesterday. the revisions permit the nctc to retain and continually assess data for a period of up to five years. the previous limit on storing, before ultimately destroying, such information had been 180 days. obama administration officials say the new longer timeframe will expand the center's ability to analyze data and identify terrorist threats.

the announcement said changes do not give the government any new powers for collecting information. left unclear is the kinds of information on americans being collected, retained, and analyzed now, and how widely commercial data-- like travel records, credit card transactions, and phone calls-- is involved. the updates, the announcement said, were spurred by reviews of the failure to identify clues that might have anticipated the november 2009 fort hood shooting and the failed terrorist attack by the so-called "underwear bomber." for more on this expansion, we turn to michael leiter, the first director of the national counter-terrorism center under presidents george w. bush and obama. he's now with a private technology firm, and is also an analyst for nbc news. and james bamford, who's written extensively about intelligence matters and agencies. his most recent book is "the shadow factory: the ultra-secret nsa from 9/11 to the

eavesdropping on america." welcome, gentlemen, to you both. mr. leiter, let me begin, before we get into a debate, explain what kind of data or information we're talking about here that would be affected by these guidelines. i mean, is it data we would normally think of as private-- cards, travel records, e-mails, phone calls? >> well, it is information that would be considered private, but what i think is most important is that it is not information that is not already collected and already held by other government agencies. it is only information that is lawfully collected, either by the f.b.i. or department of homeland security, and these new guidelines simply allow n.c.t.c., that already had access to this information, to retain this information for a longer period of time. >> warner: so explain why there is a need to retape it for longer period of time at the n.c.t.c.fit already exists at these other agencies. >> well, the reason n.t.c.t. was

created was to make sure information from different organizations -- the f.b.i., the c.i.a., the national security agency-- was properly correlated, and the best way is an example. if today, an agency collects information related to a u.s. person, in six months they have to get rid of that at the n.c.t.c. if in month seven new information indicates the first set of information could have indicated some terrorist activity, the n.t.c.t. couldn't make that correlation, and that's what this seeks to correct. >> warner: james bamford, what's wrong with that, or is there anything wrong with that, keeping this information for five years? well, you're extending it by 10 times the original limit. i mean, you're really pushing the-- pushing down the trail that leads to the total information awareness problem that affectedly the bush administration. there was an organization that came up with this idea of

collecting every pieces of information, putting it all together, and most of that was private information on u.s. systems, and then somehow-- citizens, and somehow from all that we would be able to find these terrorists. well, the public was outrage bide that idea and congress was outraged by it, and they quickly disbanded total information awareness program, and the more we keep going down this road, the more we keep coming back to that same concept. i just finished a cover story for "wired" magazine this month where we look at this very, very large data center, that's being built in utah for the national security agency, and for other agencies, also. it's going to be one million square feet. it will probably hold a yoda byte of information, which is almost indescribable, in terms of the number of pages. i think the quintillion-- 500 quintillion pages of documents. we're getting to point where

we're saying there's too much collection and the analysis just has to go on with the information it has. >> warner: mr. leiter, back to you. explain more-- is this just information that is sucked up about all americans, or is it just americans whose activities or connections ear relationships raise a red flag? >> well, judy, first, respectfully to mr. bamford-- my apologies, margaret. i have to correct what mr. bamford said. first of all, it is not a movement all the way to five years for retention. that's the ceiling. it's not a requirement for all information. and the idea behind total information awareness, you would find connections to terrorism by simply looking at all this data, credit card information and the like. that's simply not what this is. this involves information that the u.s. government already has a legal authority to collect, that it's already holding. and then the n.c.t.c. can retain that information when there's a

substantial likelihood that there is terrorism information there. and only at that point can the n.c.t.c. retain that and analyze it. and the type of information we're talking about is not a blanket collection of information for everyone who is going and using their credit card each day or making a phone call. the information that is being collected is things like information that's collected by the f.b.i. per suant to approval by the foreign intelligence surveillance corps. so's court order authorizing electronic surveillance, or information regarding individuals who are leaving or entering the united states. it is far, far from the vacuum-- the vacuuming of information that mr. bamford seems to suggest. >> warner: what about that, mr. bamford? >> i don't think it's far away at all. the f.b.i. bought into a tremendous amount of private databases from companyings. probably it's legal to do that, but we saw in the bush administration, how for years they went on conducting illegal

surveillance, and lying to the public about what was going on. president bush came out and said we were doing no warrantless eavesdropping when in fact we were doing a massive amount of warrantless eavesdropping. the amount of information the government collects i think is a problem. it's a problem because it affects the privacy, fourth amendment rights of citizens. and i think the government is drowning in information. it isn't able to find the terrorists because there's too much information not too little information. >> warner: but to you, mr. leiter. >> well, i certainly agree with mr. bamford that this is an issue and it's very important that as this information is initially collected and as it is retained by places like the national counter-terrorism center, that there is very rigorous oversight. and i certainly can't defend issues of warrantless wiretaps. in this case, you are talking about information that is collected lawfully, and then retained for terrorism purposes.

at the same time, as ronald reagan said, we should trust then verify. there needs to be a very, very rigorous set of controls to make sure that there are internal executive branch controls, that this information is protected adequately, and that there is outside review by the senate and house intelligence committers, and where appropriate, the foreign intelligence surveillance courts or other courts. that is build built-in to these guidelines. >> warner: a quick final response from you, mr. james bamford. do you have any information or any reporting that suggests those safeborders aren't in place? >> i have no idea because you don't know until there's a leak or the "new york times" or somebody else breaks a story that something is being done illegally. the problem is not only just the oversight. these problems are constantly making mistakes. ted kennedy was put on the watch list for months before he could get off it. there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people put on the watch list by

accident. the more information you have of people being put into this big calderon of data, the more chances you have of innocent people being caught up in this web. >> warner: all right, well, thank you, james bamford, and michael leiter. thank you both. >> brown: now, a look at china's latest efforts to communicate with the rest of the world... from washington, d.c. ray suarez has the story. they're at work with producers, editors and writers from around the northerly a brand spanking new state-of-the-art studio in washington, d.c. >> full coverage from when they

arrived. >> reporter: across the globe you can tune in the b.b.c., russia today, france 24, each with different degrees of editorial independence. the chinese government looked at national broadcasters and decided it had to be in that business, too. this is chinese central television america. >> it is 9:00 p.m. in washington, and 9:00 a.m. in beijing. >> ma jing is the director general of cc-tv america. >> this is a natural outgrowth of china's central television. cctv has 42 channels which it reach 1.2 billion audience in china. the market is almost saturated so we're only seek a growth point on the global market. >> reporter: chinese government owned and operated, cctv america rolled out last month, unveiling through me problem programs programs in enr american viewers. americans can watch cctv on cable and satellite system across the country. there's asia, america, one hour,

five nights a week, reporting on general news with an emphasis on economics, finance, trade, and business, as it relates to north and south america and china. former bloomberg and cnbc correspondent phillip yen is the lead anchor. >> this is a group of international journalists working together for one single common goal and in my case, it's to demonstrate business news from an international perspective. >> reporter: mike walter is the general news anchor and hosts saturday night's talk and debate show, "the heat." >> in many respects it's a fascinating place to work. you've got people from all over the world here, and from every network you can imagine. so it's been an incredible experience. >> reporter: cctv also wants to keep an eye on the rest of the hemisphere. the new show "america now" is produced by former "60 minutes" producer bob radori, and focuses on central and latin america. >> a phone call is making

international headlines. >> reporter: it's all a natural outgrowth of the chinese government's desire to make its views known around the world, says jim lore, former abc and nbc correspondent, and now he's a consultant to cctv. >> clearly the chinese want to have their perspectives on the international stage. >> cctv correspondent sean caleb live in washington tonight. >> reporter: but producing content in the united states for an american audience is motivate by another fact oaccording to longtime china watcher susan shirk. >> when a chinese government thinks that as a major global player they should have their own media organizations operating around the world, just as the u.s. does, the your peeps do, the japanese do, and even the arab world has. >> reporter: so this is "me

too-isms." well, these big important countries have this, so we should have it, too? i think it's largely that. >> cctv is just the part of the effort to speak to a wider world. once a week, american newspapers include an insert published by the government newspaper china's government has support the the opening of more than 800 confucius institutes and classrooms like this one in george mason university in virginia where people can study chinese language and culture. but is cctv free, independent journalism? is it news? >> it looks and spells like state tv. it doesn't really strike me as it being different just because there's a studio in washington. i think it's still propaganda. >> reporter: phillip cunningham has lived on and off in china for over three decades working as a journalist for various western news organizations. he's appeared on china central

television talk shows in beijing more than 100 times. >> you know, in a lot of ways, cctv-washington is an active imagery. it sounds like the news, you have the chit-chat "over to you" and the remote cameras and stuff. it looks like a western news product. but the add, the hidden agenda, the political commissars who examine and help control the daily news and what the topics will be are not working for the sake of letting chips fall where they may. they're working for the greater reputation of china. >> reporter: this theme, that journalists are supposed to echo guest line, was spelled out by the president of cctv. speak before china's national media association last year, he said, "the first social responsibility and professional ethic of media staff should be understanding their role clearly and being a good mouthpiece." according to reports, he said, "journalists who think of themselves as professionals

instead of as propaganda workers were making a fundamental mistake about identity." cunningham says cctv america's news programs show this type of bias. i asked him if any stories reflected beijing's hand. >> someone interviewed by the show wrote to me and told me what he talked about and went through everything they covered. he said, "i bet this won't make it on the air." >> reporter: cunningham discussed the incident on the condition the cctv guest not be named. the newshour confirmed the interview which appeared on "the heat" was heavily edited. >> and it was just cut to pieces. and i know for a fact there was discussion of tibet. there was discussion of having whistle said blowers, of having chinese media become more free and having elections and all five of those were cut. what was left was fairly innocuous. >> reporter: while reporting outside china doesn't worry

cctv leadership, stories of sensitive internal issues are a different matter. >> the leaders of cctv are chains government officials, from the propaganda apparatus, and increasingly from the internal security apparatus. the red lines are mostly about reporting chinese domestic developments. >> reporter: but cctv officials say they edit their stories the same way other news organizations do. >> we uphold the traditional journalistic values. we can see the accuracy of the activity, truthfulness and public accountability very important, more important than anything else. >> i don't see people coming and say, "mike, you have to change this script." it hasn't happened. >> reporter: in an e-mail to the newshour, cctv consultant jim lore objected to censorship.

>> he told us the president of cctv's comments, about journalists as government mouth piece have been exaggerated and misunderstood. >> i think it was taken, to some extent, out of context. that was an hour hopf long address made by the president. i think they also mentioned to adhere to the principles of reporting news. >> reporter: it's the mistrust of cctv editing that caused shirk to decline the broadcaster's invitation to be a regular participant on their programs. >> i have my doubts about the journalistic integrity of the organization at this point, and

i'm hoping to be proven wrong, you know. let's see how they do. >> reporter: shirk says the chinese leadership is divide between those who understand the need for a truly free press and those who want government control over who is reported. >> this battle over media freedom is still under way inside china, and it will be interesting to see how cctv reflects that. >> reporter: the journalists we spoke to at cctv america say they know they have to earn viewers' trust and the proof of will depend on the stories they produce. >> thanks for watching. we'll see you tomorrow. >> woodruff: and to the analysis of shields and brooks-- syndicated columnist mark shields and "new york times" columnist david brooks. welcome, gentlemen. trayvon martin, mark, of course,

the florida teenager shot to death by a neighborhood watch volunteer, allegedly. president obama weighed in today, said if he had a son, he would look like trayvon martin. are you surprised at how personal his comment was? >> well, the president's not somebody given to personal remarks about himself or his family, and biographical, and it seemed appropriate in this case. rick santom also made a personal commentary, comment as well. there are two kinds of issues in american politics, judy. there are position issues which should the defense budget be cut, taxes increased? you're on one side. i'm on the other. and there are valence issues. and this is a valence issue where nobody is on the other sides of trayvon martin. this is a terrible thing. the question is how convincing and sincere one is seen by the position that candidate or that politician, a public figure

takes. and i think as of this point, everybody has been plausible, and i thought the president was quite convincing. >> woodruff: how careful do politicians have to be, david, about what they say at a time like this. >> the president has to be careful because he is in charge of the justice department which is involved and you saw him in a statement today talking about how he couldn't remark on the case and he had to show aggression about confronting the events while not prejudicing anything. i think he did very well of being personal. i thought it was particularly important in this case to show some personal connection. i thought he did that well. santorum does not have the bounds of heading the justice department so he could be a little more aggressive and i thought he did quite a job of highlighting the crucial point, which is why were the local police so unaggressive in this case? >> woodruff: does it become a political issue? or does it stay in the justice? >> i have trouble seeing it become a political issue. it may have to do with some of

the laws on the books in florida, the self-defense laws, but that-- right now, that's all ahead of what we know. we don't know who was pursuing, who was not pursuing. so a lot of the talk about stand your ground and all the other rules, we'll see if he was standing his ground. it's quite possible, as some of the tapes suggest he was at least at some point pursuing, in which case self-defense wouldn't apply. >> the police dispatcher, 911, instructed him not chase, not to pursue the shooter. we do at least know that. it won't become a political issue unless and until it becomes a question of the police were on one side of this law when it passed the florida legislature. they were opposed to it because they believe it is important that a professional, somebody who is trained in the use of force, in the use of firemans, only be responsible. and obviously, those who were in favor of the law and supported by the national rifle association they point out,

wanted a larger citizen involvement, even if that did run the risk of somebody pack heat. >> that sort of is the crucial issue. does this create a monopoly on force. they're wonderful organizations. they're supposed to bize and ears and not trigger fingers. i read a study today, when you have a gun, you're more likely to think somebody else has a gun. wharf your racial or other attitudes are. it's a dangerous position. you want somebody way lot training to have that responsibility and not just some guy sitting out there. >> woodruff: the presidential campaign. mark, illinois last tuesday, louisiana tomorrow, wisconsin next week. where does it stand on the republican side? >> the republican party is split it's what i'd call the natural born and the naturalized. the natural born republicans, those who grew up in republican households and went to good schools and had successful years, probably more likely to support mitt romney.

those who probably grew up-- might have been democratic households in many cases and ideologically moved to the republican party, especially on social values and cultural values and religious values, and don't have that same level of income, are more likely to vote for rick santorum. for that reason, rick santorum has to be the favorite in louisiana. romney would be the favorite in delaware and connecticut and new york going forward. santorum would bet on wonderful virginia and kentucky and missouri. i mean-- but it's almost-- that's the cleavage within the two groups within the party right now. >> woodruff: having said that, is it mitt romney's to lose or is it? >> i have always said it's been mitt romney's to lose and the margin he's not going to get it becomes smaller and smaller. ill noyce a good win for him. there is this cleavage, it will probably last. but there was this cleavage in the democratic party, barack obama and hillary clinton.

it didn't really hurt the party. they came together at the end. i suspect that will happen. what is different is obama and clinton over the course of the primary season, their approvals stayed the same or went up a little. >> his negative has doubled since he entered the race, and his favorable stayed the same, 28%, in and his negative has doubled. david is absolutely right. four years ago at this time, a donnybrook between hillary clinton and barack obama. >> woodruff: you had this week, the comment, david of romney's aid, eric fuernstrom, one of his top advisers talking about etch a sketch. there's a lot of conversations about that, but is he right, mitt romney at the end of the primary can shake it up and start all over again is this. >> i hope so. that's what one of those candidates do. it's one of those gaffe where's you tell the truth. he certainly needs to reset the campaign, so i was very

heartened to hear him say that. because it suggests they really will restart the campaign, reset it, and whichis what they need to do. the down side, obviously, is it plays into the key doubt people have about romney, does he believe in anything? and there are certain images that get locked in people's mind-- for john kerry it was windsurferring. once you give an image to symbolize doubts like the windsurfing or michael dukakis in the taping, for mitt romney it's etch a sketch, something easily erased, so that goes people something concrete to hang their doubts on and it becomes serious. >> george herbert walker bush, running for reelection, asking what is the electronic scanner, confirming to a lot of people the sense he did not understand what was going on in their lives. i agree with david. where i disagree i don't think mitt romney can change. you can't flip-flop and then

flip. i mean, he's already flipped on issues important-- >> woodruff: you don't think he can reposition? >> he can't reposition. then you really have a character problem. he can calibrate, but he cannot in any way-- this is a man who already switched on abortion. he's already switched on gay rights. you know, he's-- what's the third one? i sound like rick perry. ( laughter ) whoops. and gun control. i mean, those are three on which he has already repositioned. so he can't flip-flop and flip. i agree with david, its natural move is to go to the middle, and i just think he is where he is. he shouldn't be talking about this stuff. he should be talking about the economy, that i'm a guy who can turn around businesses, i can turn around the country, i can turn around the country economy. >> woodruff: you're saying he has to. >> he's not going to turn back on gay marriage or anything, but he can switch to his authentic

self alcohol is management. he's a manager. he's not particularly an ideological person. he's been pretending to be hyper ideological. he can say i'm a manager. and that's not portraying anything he stands for. it's getting back to the authentic romney. >> woodruff: the budget plan was proposed this week by chairman paul ryan. where does that leave the budget fight? >> the president introduced a budget that's going nowhere. and it's been-- paul ryan has been introduced a budget praised by those on the right as bold and decisive and clairvoyant and all other things. it's science fiction. it's going nowhere. but the problem of the paul ryan budget is, politically it is an undertow for mitt romney. mitt romney is now seen as somebody who favors the rich over the middle class by 65% to 28% in the cbs news/"new york times" poll. he's seen as somebody who is out

of touch with ordinary people. here is a proposal that cuts the top rate for the wealthiest by 28.5%. think of what kind of a tax cut it would be for mitt romney. i mean, just-- he's going to be answering that. this is--un, talk about the cuts, and my goodness, the cuts are visited about basically people who are means tested, people of lower and ordinary-- even less than ordinary income-- and all the advantages go, in terms of the tax side of it, to the best off. and i just think, politically as a document, it is a disaster for republicans and particularly for mitt romney given his biographical problems. >> i have my doubts about it but not in that way. the argument behind it, and i've debated paul reinabout this is he thinks we're headed-- and i think he's right about this-- for a fiscal catastrophe some time in the next few years, and you might not like the cuts that

go in the ryan budget but it gets us toward fiscal survivability. it does not balance the budget. it increases spending 3% a year. it does not shrink government. government goes up over $1 trillion in 10 years but it avoids a fiscal catastrophe. ryan's message is you may not like this but at least i'm getting us to fiscal survivability. therefore, you have to take it seriously. the political argument is we're going to treat the american people like adults. i'm not sure it's going to work politically, but that's their argument. >> woodruff: and you're saying it's politically smart or not smart? >> i think it's politically very risky. people don't like the idea of risks. they'd rather run huge deficits. >> there have been focus groups done on it, and people can't believe that this is a semiserious proposal by a serious political thinker. i mean, you're talking about knocking two million kids out of head start in the next 10 years. you're talking about knocking a

million students out of pel grants needed for college tuitions. these are major cuts. what simpson-bole did, said it can no way increase the poverty level in the country or the economic inequality in the country. and it has to be both tax increase, as well as spending cuts. this is all spending cuts, and somehow we're going to close tax loopholes, unspecified, unmentioned. -- >> but, listen, if you want to reduce deficits -- and i agree with mark about that. if i was writing a budget i would not put that stuff in there. you have to be serious. you have to raise taxes-- and not just on the 2%, up and down-- and if nobody is is going to talk about that, at least ryan is getting us a step toward some sort of topic, i would spread it around differently, as mark said, but at least he's getting us a step forward. >> what does paul ryan's budget mean for mitt romney's taxes in

2013? glued we heard it here, gentlemen. we thank you both, mark shieldes, david brooks >> brown: finally tonight, the "hunger games" franchise guns for box office gold this weekend, following its already successful hunt for millions of readers and book sales. the hype had been building for weeks... >> when did you guys get your tickets? >> february 22! >> brown: ...and yesterday, online ticket seller fandango was reporting sales of ten tickets per second. >> we love "hunger games"! >> brown: so when the clock struck midnight, fans of the wildly-anticipated movie "the hunger games" cheered as they flooded more than 2,000 screenings across the country. "the hunger games" is based on the best-selling young adult series by suzanne collins. the trilogy has sold 24 million copies in the u.s. and been published in at least 26

different languages. >> show them how good you are. >> brown: set in post- apocalyptic north america, 16- year-old katniss everdeen becomes the film's heroine when she saves her sister from a deadly government-mandated ritual. >> i volunteer as tribute. >> brown: that throws everdeen, played by jennifer lawrence, into a vicious fight-to-the death competition with other teens on national television. "the hunger games" is poised to be one of the top-earning opening weekends ever, and early jen doll has been reading, watching, and writing about all this for "the atlantic" magazine. she joins us from new york. jen, for those not in on this, what explains the appeal of "hunger games. start with the books. what do they do? >> i think the first thing about the books is they are incredibly compelling and captivating, and yet they are young adult books.

so they're pretty easy to read. they're pretty fast paced, and there isn't a lot of, i suppose, flowery, intellectual writing that you have to parse through. you get the story. you get the plot. and you can read through it in a night, and you just keep going with it. >> brown: so, clearly, this has all built, three books, and now a lot of anticipation of the movie. the marketing is everywhere, right, and driven much of it online. >> yeah, the marketing has been insane. i think that lions gate has been touted as marketing marketing tk and the movie more than maybe even the "harry potter" series, at least the first movie that came out, and they've used social media in an incredibly extensive fashion. they've had facebook pages, tumblr, youtube channels. they have incorporated social media it seems into every aspect of the marketing of the movie and that captivates teen readers

and adults using social media. it's another way of feeling like you're part of it. >> brown: i was curious. we mentioned these very strong female character at the center. but who is it appealing to, the readers? it's not just girls or women, right? >> right, not just girls or women. and people have said while comparable series might be the "twilight" series that has really appealed because of the romance side to women. "hunger games" has a romance story but it also has kids fighting other kids to the death and a lot of action and combat scenes and things like that, that boys are pretty much equally or certainly more so than "twilight" attracted to it. >> brown: now you said action. of course, there's also violence. >> there is violence. >> brown: i have been reading and that seems to be a question about the level of violence. i mean, at the heart of this is a contest for survival involving teens killing teens. now, what kind of discussion has

that elicited? >> i think certainly parents seem to be concerned about this. you do have to ask yourself as a parent is this a movie you want to take a young child to? and i think most parents would probably say there is a pg-13 rating, so that's out there for you already. but these are difficult questions, and i think the one thing that comes through from the beginning of the book until the ending is that katniss is the main character, giving herself up as a sacrifice to save her sister. so there is deep love there, and she's doing this for a reason that it's not like a video game where people are just shooting each other for fun. there's a real depth to her story. >> brown: all right so now-- >> and i think we-- >> brown: go ahead. >> sorry, go ahead. >> brown: now with the film, though, there's always this question about adapting a very popular series of books to a film. what's happened in this case?

>> i think there are detractors. there are people who are going to say the movie was not as good as the book. i personally might like the books a bit better, but the thing with the books is that when you read a book, you can really apply yourself to it, and you can imagine things the way you want them to be. and with a movie, you see things-- it's a little bit more mainstream, and things are laid out for you. i think both are entertaining in their own ways, and certainly, for marketing purposes, i mean, it's great for lions gate, that they can have this built-in series that people are going to go see because they love the books so much. >> brown: it sure sounds like the movie is critic or criticism-proof. people will be going. >> people will-- critics seem to be liking it for the most part, so that's a positive for the movie and for lions gate, i think, despite what people may say, that plot lines were dropped from the books and that kind of thing. >> brown: all right, jen doll of the "the atlantic," thank you

so much. >> woodruff: again, the major developments of the day: army staff sergeant robert bales was formally charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder in a shooting rampage of afghan civilians. president obama nominated a physician and public health expert to be the next president of the world bank. jim yong kim is the current president of dartmouth college. and the obama administration moved to ease limits on the search and storage of information about americans. online, mark and david talk more politics and sports. hari sreenivasan explains. hari. >> sreenivasan: that's on the "doubleheader," where shields and brooks talk new orleans saints and other "mad men"-- get a primer on the health care reform law ahead of monday's supreme court arguments. submit your questions on our health page, and we'll get answers from experts during a live web chat on tuesday. plus, tonight's edition of "need to know" updates the stories of military veterans, some still

unemployed and homeless. find a link on our web site to theirs. all that and more is at newshour.pbs.org. judy. >> woodruff: and that's the newshour for tonight. on monday, we'll look at the landmark law overhauling health care as it takes center stage inside and outside the supreme court. i'm judy woodruff. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. "washington week" can be seen later this evening on most pbs stations. we'll see you online, and again here monday evening. have a nice weekend. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> and by the bill and melinda gates foundation. dedicated to the idea that all people deserve the chance to live a healthy, productive life. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> this is "bbc world news america." >> funding for this presentation is made possible by -- the freeman foundation of new york, stowe, vermont, and honolulu, newman's own foundation, and union bank. >> at union bank, our relationship managers use their expertise in global finance to guide you through the business strategies and opportunities of international commerce. we put our extended global network to work for a wide range of companies, from small businesses to major corporations. what can we do for you? what can we do for you?